In a message dated 8/9/2009 9:59:15 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
saintonge(a)telus.net writes:
> Most of these
> rare works will be in large cities where there will also be a
> concentration of people available to verify the material. For much of
> our material the acceptance criterion validly remains verifiable rather
> than verified.>>
>
-------------------
Yes of course. I would still like to see a valid example of a rare work
cited where there is no scholarly edition available. I'm skeptical that such
a case exists.
As I said, we don't require verification of all things by all editors, and
we don't want a situation where only a few editors can verify *a* thing.
What we want is something in the middle, a bell curve of verification-ability.
But with both 10% ends chopped off. Other encyclopedias do not cite to
rare holdings, they will cite to a published edition of such a rare holding.
Will Johnson
**************
A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in
just 2 easy steps!
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1222846709x1201493018/aol?redir=htt…
hmpgID=115&bcd=JulystepsfooterNO115)
Skepticism rears it's ugly head.
Are we, as internet sleuths given enough information here to *find* the
name of the doctor, the name of the condition?
If we are not, or if a generic-type search for rare lung condition with
unproven treatment... or whatever fails to find anything useful....
I'm like that, hard-hearted, suspicious, cynical, etc.
By the way what is a "rare" lung capacity. I think what he must mean is a
rare condition which causes diminished lung capacity.
Turn up the name of the doctor, and I will turn up some publication
mentioning his treatment.
Will Johnson
In a message dated 8/7/2009 4:47:27 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
gwern0(a)gmail.com writes:
I'm a little skeptical that this is any of the real reasons, given the
fallibility of human memory, and never seeing anything like this mentioned in
materials from the early days - but this would be a great reason, because
this doctor is not described as publishing in an RS, so his knowledge is OR!
(Bwa ha ha ha. This is almost as good as those Afghan news agencies not
being RSs.)
In a message dated 8/9/2009 7:42:48 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
bluecaliocean(a)me.com writes:
> What if I live in a place where there isn't any library for hours (or
> days even) via whatever transportation I have available?
>
> What if I have a library...but it's under-resourced, under-paid and
> there's no way I can really get books or newsletter to help cite
> wikipedia?
>
> What would I do then? Do I just not verify citations?>>
-------------
Hypothetical. We don't require a system where any editor can verify any
citation. We also don't want a system where a vanishingly small number of
editors can verify *a* citation. We want something in the middle.
Your library itself does not need the item. That is why God created
Inter-Library Loan. Get jiggy with it. It solves many problems. Provided you
know the repository, and provided the item circulates at all, you can order it
to come to you. You don't have to go to it.
Will Johnson
**************
A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy
steps!
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1222846709x1201493018/aol?redir=htt…
bcd=JulystepsfooterNO115)
In a message dated 8/9/2009 6:26:13 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
dan(a)tobias.name writes:
> How come online "for-pay" stuff is to be excluded by your proposed
> rule, but not on-paper "for pay" stuff? Printed books, magazines,
> and newspapers are not generally free.>>
--------------
Again this is not what I said. I did not say that online for-pay stuff is
to be excluded. For example the New York Times has a paid online
subscription. Linking to it is fine-and-dandy by me. Why? Because you can also read
it, without paying anything. There is a "free" way to access the same
information.
Any printed item *is* generally free. The free version is "go to your
library". You don't have to pay a thing.
Will Johnson
**************
A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy
steps!
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1222846709x1201493018/aol?redir=htt…
bcd=JulystepsfooterNO115)
On Fri, 07 Aug 2009 21:27:16 -0400, wjhonson(a)aol.com wrote:
> You're right. Several years ago, we had discussed this very issue.
> That nothing "free" is really free is you have to pay to travel *to* it.
> IIRC we basically agreed that traveling about, is just part of your
> normal life.
So if I wanted to cite some rare book which I happened to know of
only one copy in existence, located at the Amundsen-Scott South Pole
Station in Antarctica, it would be up to you to arrange travel there
to check it.
--
== Dan ==
Dan's Mail Format Site: http://mailformat.dan.info/
Dan's Web Tips: http://webtips.dan.info/
Dan's Domain Site: http://domains.dan.info/
On Fri, 07 Aug 2009 20:04:58 -0400, wjhonson(a){gag,vomit,retch}aol.com
wrote:
> You have completely ignored the requirement that I am here *solely*
> referring to items which live, online, behind subscription walls. If
> the item is free, then it does not. So that removes the majority of
> your counter-argument.
How come online "for-pay" stuff is to be excluded by your proposed
rule, but not on-paper "for pay" stuff? Printed books, magazines,
and newspapers are not generally free.
--
== Dan ==
Dan's Mail Format Site: http://mailformat.dan.info/
Dan's Web Tips: http://webtips.dan.info/
Dan's Domain Site: http://domains.dan.info/
I think David you have not understood at all what I said.
Please explain your objection in a manner highlighting what you think I
said, and why you would object to what I said.
Will
**************
A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy
steps!
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1222846709x1201493018/aol?redir=htt…
bcd=JulystepsfooterNO115)
In a message dated 8/8/2009 6:50:00 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
dgoodmanny(a)gmail.com writes:
> A reference that requires payment is still a reference and there is no
> reason to remove it. Almost always, these paid sources are subscribed
> to by libraries to which many hundreds of people here have access, and
> can be accessed at least by those members of that institution, and
> often by public visitors to it.
-------------
David please read again what I said, your response above does not address
it at all. I do not object to references that require subscription, I create
some of these myself as you should know by now. You are taking one phrase
out of context.
Will
**************
A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy
steps!
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1222846709x1201493018/aol?redir=htt…
bcd=JulystepsfooterNO115)
David my response was in *three* parts not one. You must consider all
three parts as one whole response, not each one as a seperate response.
Part 1 was solely dealing with items which have a subscription wall and
only live on the internet and have no other source whatsoever. Can you name
one of these please? Most people seem to fail to understand to what I refer.
**************
A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy
steps!
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1222846709x1201493018/aol?redir=htt…
bcd=JulystepsfooterNO115)